Recommended Posts

18 minutes ago, Forourselves said:

So... serious question here. If "Rational people"conclude that it is a problem with the boat design, and you put yourself in that group of "rational people" since EVERY SINGLE TEAM has also had the very same problems with the F50, do you then conclude that the F50 also has the very same problem with its design too? If so, do you then admit, the F50 is also as dangerous and unstable as you claim the AC75 is?

Judging by everything we've seen, the F50 is far more stable and fast at speed than the AC75. We'll see if the speed component holds (I think it will) - but there is no question about the stability. The AC75 is a disaster when it comes to racing stability. And since that's the case, it will have a huge impact on racing speed.

So - we will see.

Oh - and th AC75 is the ugliest thing on water. The F50 is gorgeous. So there's that too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Lickindip said:

actually its more dependant on the length of the attachment between foil and arm ... then there is the anhedral which allows you to ride that foil in the water column before breaking the surface. the hull shape has minimal effect on the RM. if anything they are riding slightly higher with a bustle. if you are refering to RM to get onto the foils potentially, but then a bustle will give you a much smoother transition where the flat hull would be a big lurch, which is what we have seen from AM

image.png.c65cda1f35f27e0791e6f2f52f42fe10.png

The RM is dependent on 3 points:
1) Length of the attachment, also a longer attachment can create 1) extra drag 2) a bit more RM on the windward side

2) Anhedral foil vs flat one

3) Hull, the bustle obliges to fly higher thus with a more vertical arm thus less RM

So, flipper was not only unstable but also lacking RM. The test boat seemed but better to me, but perhaps that's what they were willing to show too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Forourselves said:

So... serious question here. If "Rational people"conclude that it is a problem with the boat design, and you put yourself in that group of "rational people" since EVERY SINGLE TEAM has also had the very same problems with the F50, do you then conclude that the F50 also has the very same problem with its design too? If so, do you then admit, the F50 is also as dangerous and unstable as you claim the AC75 is?

They're pretty stable then the top of the rig is in the water as we've seen.

They're even more stable upside down..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Boink said:

Finally, we see some common ground between operating Difficult to manage boats - and you Immediately claim that it is now an inherent issue rather than Team specific or Crew related.

Who should we believe, the old has been architect or the designer, Verdier ?

There are concerns these AC75s are going to be dangerous? 
We have to be super careful.

Could you foresee a trickle down, scaled down grand prix monohull boat come on the market? Something like a TP52 size with this foil system?
That was the intention to start with, it was a bit of a dream but you would not be able to sail the Sydney Hobart for example on a boat like this. Yes, maybe on an inshore grand prix circuit but I don’t see the public being able to have access to something like this, you would always be obliged to have fixed ballast that gives you stability. It is a kind of strange boat, not very natural.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, smackdaddy said:

Judging by everything we've seen, the F50 is far more stable and fast than the AC75. We'll see if the speed component holds (I think it will) - but there is no question about the stability. The AC75 is a disaster when it comes to racing stability. And since that's the case, it will have a huge impact on racing speed.

So - we will see.

Oh - and th AC75 is the ugliest thing on water. The F50 is gorgeous. So there's that too.

You just proved me right! You are full of shit because the "images"you go on about are there for the world to see. The F50's are a disaster. Fragile, old, slow pieces of garbage that tried to copy ETNZ's AC50 but couldn't because well, thats what you get from second place teams lol. 

All their "Champions"got absolutely demolished (again) by Bens AC team, and they're now promoting Ineos Team UK as the face of their SailGP series. Oh what a shit show that series is. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Tornado-Cat said:

Who should we believe, the old has been architect or the designer, Verdier ?

There are concerns these AC75s are going to be dangerous? 
We have to be super careful.

Could you foresee a trickle down, scaled down grand prix monohull boat come on the market? Something like a TP52 size with this foil system?
That was the intention to start with, it was a bit of a dream but you would not be able to sail the Sydney Hobart for example on a boat like this. Yes, maybe on an inshore grand prix circuit but I don’t see the public being able to have access to something like this, you would always be obliged to have fixed ballast that gives you stability. It is a kind of strange boat, not very natural.

FFS Troll. Its fast, you have to be "super careful"on anything that goes fast.

Second, the Sydney/ Hobart? It was NEVER designed to compete off shore. Its an INSHORE MATCH RACING BOAT not an Offshore boat.

Sheesh...still grasping at straws

  • Like 1
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Tornado-Cat said:

) Hull, the bustle obliges to fly higher thus with a more vertical arm thus less RM

ummm you may want to re-draw your force diagrams ... flying higher doesn't give you more or less RM, your centre of mass is still in the same place and your pivot point is the same

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Forourselves said:

FFS Troll. Its fast, you have to be "super careful"on anything that goes fast.

Second, the Sydney/ Hobart? It was NEVER designed to compete off shore. Its an INSHORE MATCH RACING BOAT not an Offshore boat.

Sheesh...still grasping at straws

Ah ah, are you saying that Verdier is grasping at straws ? :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Tornado-Cat said:

Ah ah, are you saying that Verdier is grasping at straws ? :lol:

No, im saying you are. That comment has nothing to do with, anything really. Verdier said it couldnt sail Sydney - Hobart. So what? Im betting an F50 couldn't either. Because guess what, theyre not designed to.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Forourselves said:

You just proved me right! You are full of shit because the "images"you go on about are there for the world to see. The F50's are a disaster. Fragile, old, slow pieces of garbage that tried to copy ETNZ's AC50 but couldn't because well, thats what you get from second place teams lol. 

All their "Champions"got absolutely demolished (again) by Bens AC team, and they're now promoting Ineos Team UK as the face of their SailGP series. Oh what a shit show that series is. 

Well, one of these events has boats breaking 50 knots in racing (and still moving up the scale). The other doesn't. Never has.

And yes, BA seriously raised the bar in Sydney's SailGP event. How? By being stable at speed...because the boat allows it.

Anyway, I appreciate the plaudits - but absolutely no one on God's green earth can prove you right.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Lickindip said:

ummm you may want to re-draw your force diagrams ... flying higher doesn't give you more or less RM, your centre of mass is still in the same place and your pivot point is the same

If you fly higher you cannot cant as much and extend the arm.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, smackdaddy said:

I was just impressed they were sailing the thing 32km offshore.

32 km from the base, not necessarily that far offshore.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What AC class after IACC could you even dream of sailing Sydney to Hobart in? 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, NeedAClew said:

What AC class after IACC could you even dream of sailing Sydney to Hobart in? 

Or even the IACC class. Even a Version 5 would break something in big seas in the Bass Strait. Only an idiot would take an AC Class boat offshore.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, The_Alchemist said:

32 km from the base, not necessarily that far offshore.

So they were north?

13347984_ScreenShot2020-08-02at10_49_27PM.thumb.png.fa94c4f3aefa7049ba8939ea0932e7f3.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So apparently this beauty is being unpacked for display down at the base. They should take her out and line up with Defiant. She'd definitely be competitive against the whale lol

m370_crop169004_1024x576_1539787830C4D2.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Tornado-Cat said:

If you fly higher you cannot cant as much and extend the arm.

ahh so you are assuming the arm is rotated rather than the foil just being deeper / shallower in the water column.

guess the only way to figure out if the teams have differing arm rotations is a front/back on view with the mast being vertical

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, smackdaddy said:

Yeah - okay Clean. I really don't know why you're so into stalking me - but if you do know all that stuff, then you also know your first statement was way off.

In any case, I don't care about anyone's "CV" (or personal life). I just respond to what they type/present on this silly sailing forum...just like everyone else.

You can go back to PA now...and rest assured that I certainly won't follow you there because I couldn't care less what you have to say.

CLEAN has lost the plot by the sounds of it. Lockdown fever or does he have the Rona himself? :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Lickindip said:

ahh so you are assuming the arm is rotated rather than the foil just being deeper / shallower in the water column.

guess the only way to figure out if the teams have differing arm rotations is a front/back on view with the mast being vertical

Not only that, the foil are rotating inward can diminish the RM thus helping the boat fly earlier.

A mini keel, better IMO than a bustle, can also be used to put instruments/weight, and lower the CoG of the boat for better stability of an inherintly unstable boat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Forourselves said:

 Only an idiot would take an AC Class boat offshore.

Gretel KA1close 2nd on handicap1980 Sydney to Hobart.

SHYR80-Gretel-and-Evelyn-Tasman-Is-MISC-CYCA-PHOTOS.jpg.f601dc4268e7ef267ea811a52f50c07e.jpg

Bruce Gould 15.54

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Tornado-Cat said:

Not only that, the foil are rotating inward can diminish the RM thus helping the boat fly earlier.

A mini keel, better IMO than a bustle, can also be used to put instruments/weight, and lower the CoG of the boat for better stability of an inherintly unstable boat.

its all a trade off,

get the foil under the boat for true vertical lift, but then there is no RM other than the foil weight so you cant power up the rig,

the AM video a while back had the foil right out when starting and they tucked it in slightly closer once they got underway so guess the teams are working out which is the better mode to be in at each time

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Lickindip said:

its all a trade off,

get the foil under the boat for true vertical lift, but then there is no RM other than the foil weight so you cant power up the rig,

the AM video a while back had the foil right out when starting and they tucked it in slightly closer once they got underway so guess the teams are working out which is the better mode to be in at each time

Like a foiling windsurfer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Fiji Bitter said:

It was your pretentious BumBuddy Stinkray who implied that Grunter follows him:

Maybe you should ask Grunter himself if he is a fan of you two, or otherwise just continue your incestuous ménage à trois with SmugBuddy instead.

He surely has more to learn from us than from his fanboys.

But, eh, eh, you use a froggy keyboard, ........parbleu. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, smackdaddy said:

So they were north?

13347984_ScreenShot2020-08-02at10_49_27PM.thumb.png.fa94c4f3aefa7049ba8939ea0932e7f3.png

Come on.. the link said they 32 km from the base.  From the map, even if they were 32 km straight south they are not 32 km from shore.  It is a minor issue, not a bridge to die on...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Tornado-Cat said:

Like a foiling windsurfer.

yes but no

you don't see the AC50 and F50 guys all standing on the leeward hull above the lifting foil to get going do you?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Lickindip said:

its all a trade off,

get the foil under the boat for true vertical lift, but then there is no RM other than the foil weight so you cant power up the rig,

the AM video a while back had the foil right out when starting and they tucked it in slightly closer once they got underway so guess the teams are working out which is the better mode to be in at each time

Some of the videos showed AM sailing close to the water and the foil tip breaking the surface, so obviously they had the foil arm farther out away from the hull.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Lickindip said:

yes but no

you don't see the AC50 and F50 guys all standing on the leeward hull above the lifting foil to get going do you?

In the (impossible) scenario of the lw foil under the center of the hull the ww ballased foil would replace the windsurfer sailor weight.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, The_Alchemist said:

Some of the videos showed AM sailing close to the water and the foil tip breaking the surface, so obviously they had the foil arm farther out away from the hull.

etnz tips are breaking the surface as well ... without measuring the foils length/anhedral and especially the attachment between the foil and arm we just don't know

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, mikenz2 said:

Defiant heading out this morning:

Shot from nearly water level today so you can see how low these boats fly. They've headed out to Course E (Waiheke/Maraetai way), with the current haze I'm not likely to get any other videos today.

They got out of the water quickly and sailed stable, close to the water.  As others have stated, we never know what the boats are testing, so it is very hard to make performance conclusions based upon a small set of observations.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Tornado-Cat said:

In the (impossible) scenario of the lw foil under the center of the hull the ww ballased foil would replace the windsurfer sailor weight.

isnt that what you are seeing with the AC50/F50, foil under hull but they want their max weight as far away as possible (sailers) on the windward hull

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Lickindip said:

etnz tips are breaking the surface as well ... without measuring the foils length/anhedral and especially the attachment between the foil and arm we just don't know

Of course not, but the foils on NZ B1 are much longer (bulbless) and one of they is a flat T.  So it would be safe to assume NZ can have the foils break the surface while running deeper than the shorter dihedral foils on AM.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, The_Alchemist said:

Of course not, but the foils on NZ B1 are much longer (bulbless) and one of they is a flat T.  So it would be safe to assume NZ can have the foils break the surface while running deeper than the shorter dihedral foils on AM.

you are going to have to specify dimensions with claims like 'much longer'

image.png.2c02d4947b86aca7a684e6933814ae4e.png

the fact the foil tips come relatively to the same point under the boat tells me that the outer tips will be approx at the same point for the same rotation

image.png.3a67b1fec5334605f521cd7707359a96.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Lickindip said:

you are going to have to specify dimensions with claims like 'much longer'

image.png.2c02d4947b86aca7a684e6933814ae4e.png

the fact the foil tips come relatively to the same point under the boat tells me that the outer tips will be approx at the same point for the same rotation

image.png.3a67b1fec5334605f521cd7707359a96.png

The picture is at an angle, you are only assuming that they come to the same point...(there is no view down the centerline).  The only thing you can see from your picture is that the T foil is attached deeper than the dihedral foil ( note the differences in the length of the black area on the arms.  Anyway, I was talking about the AM foils being shorter than the NZ foils (which everyone agrees upon because they have to contain the ballast instead of using a bulb).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, The_Alchemist said:

The picture is at an angle, you are only assuming that they come to the same point...(there is no view down the centerline).  The only thing you can see from your picture is that the T foil is attached deeper than the dihedral foil ( note the differences in the length of the black area on the arms.  Anyway, I was talking about the AM foils being shorter than the NZ foils (which everyone agrees upon because they have to contain the ballast instead of using a bulb).

I've done it for you ...

NYYC is slightly under the 2m max span allowed

image.png.301f87b28d37eb93aaa28703006f16b9.png

 

LR is about the same size

image.png.1a61ab927e13658a1b1b0ad5bb0cf8ea.png

so unless ETNZ has foils longer than the max allowable length ... please explain how they are MUCH LONGER

PS, find me a good square view of ETNZ B1 and ill do the same

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, smackdaddy said:

I'm on it.

Can I have some of whatever it is that you're on ? It must be some pretty good shit.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Priscilla said:

Gretel KA1close 2nd on handicap1980 Sydney to Hobart.

SHYR80-Gretel-and-Evelyn-Tasman-Is-MISC-CYCA-PHOTOS.jpg.f601dc4268e7ef267ea811a52f50c07e.jpg

Bruce Gould 15.54

Gretel was no longer an AC boat when she did the Hobart, you have to comply with the offshore rules, lifelines, sealed cabin etc.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

looks like they are bang on the 2m max span

image.png.b18404386a2dd26c2d6eef39090f4a1f.png

image.png.806a1c8225f99cad06c7670f906f5828.png

 

if anything there is 50-100mm difference

can this be put to bed now ... the foil lengths between these teams is within an ants dick

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Tornado-Cat said:

These flat hull flying low clearly have more righting moment than those with a bustle,

What the fuck are you talking about. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, NeedAClew said:

I've been crew on a sailboat pretty far from the South Maui harbor. But of course, we were pretty close to Lanai by then. ;)

You were in some pretty deep water by then though. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, smackdaddy said:

I guess you didn't see the videos I put up of EVERY SINGLE TEAM having the EXACT SAME problems?

I don't know what conclusion you draw from that - but most rational people would conclude that it's a problem with the boat design - not the teams or crews.

Either go back and watch those videos - or have Clean explain it to you.

The Delusion that you represent by writing this statement is clear to everyone here except for yourself. However, just because you cannot see the delusional rantings that you post ad infinitum, does not make them any less delusional.

There are hundreds, no thousands of posts within this AC Forum where all you do is spew hatred towards ETNZ and yet idolise AM. The imbalance that you potray is just so far fetched. 

The whole time that AM were back home they operated in a very media controlled  environment. Now they are in the real world - so to speak - where the locals are more interested and educated in this branch of our sport - probably moreso than anywhere else on the planet - suddenly we are seeing AM commit all the same handling errors that ETNZ have since day 1. Coincidence? Not a fucking chance....... Rusty crew work....... somewhat, but not as contributory as suggested here - even if that could be interpreted as a concillatory free pass by the genuinely interested posters.

Not You Though - AM is Fast this, Stable that....... You have taken Doug Lords game and put it on Steroids.

Consider that 99% of the posters here probably hold or held a driving licence at some point. Could they Drive a current Formula 1 car? Not fucking likely.

Tiger Woods, even at the  height of his powers, still managed to hunt down Rough, Trees and more than a few hundred bunkers. Does that label him a Sunday Hackwit? Not Fucking Likely.

Ronaldo & Messi, for all the Ballon D'ors, World Cups and fat bank balances - still mange to miss the Goal on a regular basis. Does that detract their value or diminish their desirability to all the leading Managers/Coaches? Not Fucking Likely

Marc Marquez managed to find the gravel trap on Turn 4 twice in one race - not so lucky the second time. 7 times a World Champion. But in your twisted world - he's a Fucking Amateur because he crashed it.......

So when you take a cutting edge boat design with no previous parallel learning experience, and inherent instability and try to hustle a boat around there are going to be stuff ups. Yet enduring your endless bullshit about how how useless ETNZ are and how crap their boats are is just too much. There has never been any balance in your opinion. 

AM has managed to replicate every mistake of ETNZ in a week. Not looking as Golden as you had hoped for. Your position now looks utterly untenable, even to you.

Instead, now that their superior stability  - is shown to be more normal, and far from exemplary, you Turncoat your whole position and instead blame the class design. But not because the class is just difficult to master. No, in your infinite wisdom if the pro's can't handle them - they are just unfit for purpose. FFS, this is the absurdity of your delusions.        AND claim that you represented this position from the very start. 

 

  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Boink said:

Finally, we see some common ground between operating Difficult to manage boats - and you Immediately claim that it is now an inherent issue rather than Team specific or Crew related. Wow. Just Wow. Complete Trumpism at work. 

 

4 hours ago, Tornado-Cat said:

Who should we believe, the old has been architect or the designer, Verdier ?

There are concerns these AC75s are going to be dangerous? 
We have to be super careful.

Could you foresee a trickle down, scaled down grand prix monohull boat come on the market? Something like a TP52 size with this foil system?
That was the intention to start with, it was a bit of a dream but you would not be able to sail the Sydney Hobart for example on a boat like this. Yes, maybe on an inshore grand prix circuit but I don’t see the public being able to have access to something like this, you would always be obliged to have fixed ballast that gives you stability. It is a kind of strange boat, not very natural.

You been stealing the Sherry again Old Man?

Who here claims to be an Architect?

You then go on and completely misrepresent and misquote Verdier.......

Good one Troll Cat! Your value is soaring on the  back of these pearls of wisdom and nuggets of insight........

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Tornado-Cat said:

Not only that, the foil are rotating inward can diminish the RM thus helping the boat fly earlier.

A mini keel, better IMO than a bustle, can also be used to put instruments/weight, and lower the CoG of the boat for better stability of an inherintly unstable boat.

So in your thinking a Bustle is Bigger and Keel Smaller.

Yet a Keel is superior becuase it can store gear and lower the COG - yet no one would not utilise a more Voluminous Bustle for the eact same purpose? Good One Idiot.

And with whom did you have the argument about Foil Cant Angle and Foil Shape within the Specified Foil Box, and why having as long a Foil arm extension is beneficial, with last November? It's gratifying to see that you now claim these concepts as both worthy and correct, rather than the complete opposite position you fought for then.....

You still haven't grasped the concept of MWL and blending competing issues/solutions with each other though have you? And why this might lead to Bustle or Keels. Nor do you understand how flight height is a variable rather than a fixed constant. Nor have you considered that the pesky sea (lake or pond in your experience) doesn't always stay flat. It would be a stretch for you to consider the positive outcomes of flying nose down upwind, yet higher and more level downwind.

Nor can you or your other founding member of the Soggy Biscuit Club (Spam Daddy) deduce why if AM is the first of the first generation of a new class, and because it originates from neither the Defender or CoR, who designed the rule, who both launched with Bustle/Keel shaped hulls, and the only other team who launched with a flat scow hull has since retro fitted a rudimentary keel to their boat. So it can be argued that AM and Ineos launched B1's whilst ETNZ and LR launched B1.5's and Ineos upgraded their hull to become a B1.35.

So previously I have said that Defiant is the laggard of the pack - rudimentary hull shape, with the clusterfuck of a Rhinoplasty for a bowsprit, rudimentary Rope controllled, boom actuated rig, with untidy an ineffectual mainsail endplating onto a centre spine that was never given the full aero treatment and further compromised by the aft placed crew sitting en-mass in two side by side rows (and now commented on as having a fat Arse and stern down in manoeuvres). There is of course the issue of making the Rudder elevator do more work than is necessary by the compromised crew location. But these are just some of the compromises that AM design team would have had to make to be the first to launch. But even with delayed foil arms and 5 months lost to  Virus, the Defiant design is looking distinctly second rate and uninspiring compared to the other 3. 

We could go on but I can hear your skulll cracking with the immense pressure that it has suddenly been exerted with as your Pea Brain swells with all these thoughts. 

Take a Panadol, with all that Sherry you have been stealing, I fear you have a headache coming on.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Forourselves said:

Only an idiot would take an AC Class boat offshore.

White Crusader (12m) did the Fastnet added pushpit, pulpit  and stanchions, heads, way too small engine, gas stove and pipe cots other than that pretty much as she was after the challenger series..got round and finished... Wetest ride in the fleet by a country mile.:D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Stingray~ said:

I’ve been out that far on a few fishing charter boats, even went almost around the world once on a passenger ship. But I’ve not been on a sailboat that far out and am in no way ashamed to admit it, it’s just a fact :) 

 

Ha ha ha, you fucking Muppet.you have nothing to offer this forum regards sailing aside from your cut and paste feed. 

FO.

I'll save this post.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, smackdaddy said:

Either go back and watch those videos - or have Clean explain it to you.

Smackbadly is a fucking shill.

Karma is a bitch and I heard she is looking for him.  Can I watch?

giphy.gif

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Lickindip can you measure the angle of the top of lee-foil arm relative to horizontal (gunwale to gunwale)?

If the bustle-less boats are running their arms flatter/more horizontal they should get more righting moment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Boink said:

So in your thinking a Bustle is Bigger and Keel Smaller.

Yet a Keel is superior becuase it can store gear and lower the COG - yet no one would not utilise a more Voluminous Bustle for the eact same purpose? Good One Idiot.

And with whom did you have the argument about Foil Cant Angle and Foil Shape within the Specified Foil Box, and why having as long a Foil arm extension is beneficial, with last November? It's gratifying to see that you now claim these concepts as both worthy and correct, rather than the complete opposite position you fought for then.....

You still haven't grasped the concept of MWL and blending competing issues/solutions with each other though have you? And why this might lead to Bustle or Keels. Nor do you understand how flight height is a variable rather than a fixed constant. Nor have you considered that the pesky sea (lake or pond in your experience) doesn't always stay flat. It would be a stretch for you to consider the positive outcomes of flying nose down upwind, yet higher and more level downwind.

Nor can you or your other founding member of the Soggy Biscuit Club (Spam Daddy) deduce why if AM is the first of the first generation of a new class, and because it originates from neither the Defender or CoR, who designed the rule, who both launched with Bustle/Keel shaped hulls, and the only other team who launched with a flat scow hull has since retro fitted a rudimentary keel to their boat. So it can be argued that AM and Ineos launched B1's whilst ETNZ and LR launched B1.5's and Ineos upgraded their hull to become a B1.35.

So previously I have said that Defiant is the laggard of the pack - rudimentary hull shape, with the clusterfuck of a Rhinoplasty for a bowsprit, rudimentary Rope controllled, boom actuated rig, with untidy an ineffectual mainsail endplating onto a centre spine that was never given the full aero treatment and further compromised by the aft placed crew sitting en-mass in two side by side rows (and now commented on as having a fat Arse and stern down in manoeuvres). There is of course the issue of making the Rudder elevator do more work than is necessary by the compromised crew location. But these are just some of the compromises that AM design team would have had to make to be the first to launch. But even with delayed foil arms and 5 months lost to  Virus, the Defiant design is looking distinctly second rate and uninspiring compared to the other 3. 

We could go on but I can hear your skulll cracking with the immense pressure that it has suddenly been exerted with as your Pea Brain swells with all these thoughts. 

Take a Panadol, with all that Sherry you have been stealing, I fear you have a headache coming on.

SOGGY BISCUIT CLUB

Classic.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Tornado-Cat said:

Like a foiling windsurfer.

come back when you actually understand what you are equating it to. at the moment you really don't.

this obsession with dumbing down something saying oh its like this or like that  it's horse shit! an AC 75 ISNT like anything else so just stop.

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Boink said:

 

You been stealing the Sherry again Old Man?

Who here claims to be an Architect?

You then go on and completely misrepresent and misquote Verdier.......

Good one Troll Cat! Your value is soaring on the  back of these pearls of wisdom and nuggets of insight........

He's dumb, never been on a foiling windsurfer, and as a Quebecois, wishes he were really French

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, mikenz2 said:

Defiant heading out this morning:

Shot from nearly water ...

Interesting how they build momentum and pop out. Would be interesting to make a comparison of the few takeoff videos we've seen between boats. Beyond what i can do on a phone unfortunately.

12 hours ago, weta27 said:

Different treatment in the "decksweeper" department today (edit - compared with a week ago)

decksweeper1.jpg

decksweeper2.jpg

The batten right above the boom (?) is interesting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Terry Hollis said:

Gretel was no longer an AC boat when she did the Hobart, you have to comply with the offshore rules, lifelines, sealed cabin etc.

Even so, doubt an AC50 or AC72 even if could meet offshore rules would do. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Woolfy said:

White Crusader (12m) did the Fastnet added pushpit, pulpit  and stanchions, heads, way too small engine, gas stove and pipe cots other than that pretty much as she was after the challenger series..got round and finished... Wetest ride in the fleet by a country mile.:D

The ultimate converted 12 metre must have been Ted Turner's American Eagle. He campaigned her hard as an offshore racer, even setting a race record in the 1971 Fastnet Race.

Amusing and riviting story about Ted Turner in his early years here:

https://www.google.com/amp/s/vault.si.com/.amp/vault/1971/07/12/in-the-wake-of-the-capsize-kid

PS. For the very young ones here, a boisterous Ted Turner, the Mouth of the South, not only defended the Cup in 1977, but of course also build the CNN news empire...

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looking again at the too-oft reposted photo of Te Aihe lying on her side, I am struck again by what's missing: shredded saran wrap wing requiring a trip back to the shed and end of the day's racing.  :)

 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, weta27 said:

Different treatment in the "decksweeper" department today (edit - compared with a week ago)

decksweeper1.jpg

decksweeper2.jpg

its a completely different main rather than a new foot treatment , the batten passing through the HH logo has vanished.

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, JALhazmat said:

its a completely different main rather than a new foot treatment , the batten passing through the HH logo has vanished.

 

Or the other way around.......; > )

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Boink said:

The Delusion that you represent by writing this statement is clear to everyone here except for yourself.

Really? Let's take a look...

7 hours ago, Boink said:

So when you take a cutting edge boat design with no previous parallel learning experience, and inherent instability and...

Ahm - isn't that exactly what I've been saying? The AC75 has a serious stability problem - as demonstrated across all the teams. Since you agree - no delusion there, right?

7 hours ago, Boink said:

Yet enduring your endless bullshit about how how useless ETNZ are and how crap their boats are is just too much. There has never been any balance in your opinion.

I've presented photos and videos for every point I've made regarding how poorly the Emiratis have performed. As for "balance"...

7 hours ago, Boink said:

AM has managed to replicate every mistake of ETNZ in a week. Not looking as Golden as you had hoped for. Your position now looks utterly untenable, even to you.

Every mistake? Well, except for this...

yysw275971.jpg

I believe the Emiratis are still the only ones to hold this humiliating "honor". So whose position in "untenable"? And finally...

7 hours ago, Boink said:

nstead, now that their superior stability  - is shown to be more normal, and far from exemplary, you Turncoat your whole position and instead blame the class design. But not because the class is just difficult to master. No, in your infinite wisdom if the pro's can't handle them - they are just unfit for purpose. FFS, this is the absurdity of your delusions.        AND claim that you represented this position from the very start.

Back to your own "inherent instability" point above. And, yes, I have held this position since the very first animation of this ridiculous boat came out. Go look at my posts.

Sorry, but you're just not very good at this.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, weta27 said:

Different treatment in the "decksweeper" department today (edit - compared with a week ago)

That top picture looks like they've just zipped on a 'sweeper' section to one of the original mainsails - it looks pretty agricultural.

If that thing is back out then hopefully the proper deck-sweeper is just in the loft getting some more mods because that still looks to be behind the other teams in terms of shape and profile against their centre pod.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, JALhazmat said:

its a completely different main rather than a new foot treatment , the batten passing through the HH logo has vanished.

 

Not to mention the placement of their sponsor logos. Also, the main with the integral deck sweeper appears to have a much longer foot length. Assuming the clew webbing 25mm, it's roughly 125-150mm between their reference marks. While I would expect some difference in where the clew ends up depending on the desired camber, 250-300mm is considerable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I do not get the obsession with how unstable they are? Moths are unstable, 18ft skiffs are unstable, The foiling cats were/are unstable, a Bermuda fitted dinghy is unstable. Formula 1 cars, touring cars, race cars are unstable (at the limit), The racing drone I fly is unstable. Almost anything fast and at the limit is unstable. That's generally what is allowing it to be fast and we watch in awe as skilled humans tame these unstable beasts and squeeze the most out of them and make them look far more under control than what they are. That's what makes it exciting and that's why we watch. If it wasn't on the edge of control it would be boring to watch and we wouldn't. I lived on a Hans Christian for years and it was fit for cruising but no one wants to see two of them duking it out for yachtings greatest spectacle. 

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, JustinL42 said:

I do not get the obsession with how unstable they are? Moths are unstable, 18ft skiffs are unstable, The foiling cats were/are unstable, a Bermuda fitted dinghy is unstable. Formula 1 cars, touring cars, race cars are unstable (at the limit), The racing drone I fly is unstable. Almost anything fast and at the limit is unstable. That's generally what is allowing it to be fast and we watch in awe as skilled humans tame these unstable beasts and squeeze the most out of them and make them look far more under control than what they are. That's what makes it exciting and that's why we watch. If it wasn't on the edge of control it would be boring to watch and we wouldn't. I lived on a Hans Christian for years and it was fit for cruising but no one wants to see two of them duking it out for yachtings greatest spectacle. 

I'm not sure that many people are actually obsessed with the boat's instability, probably just the same gripe over and over again?

 

Frankly, I'm astonished by how well they do staying up. We've seen a lot more traditional gear breakage than capsizes which is surprising given the scope of the innovation that's going on. 

 

Also the idea of a Hans Christian AC is a hilarious image. Imagining Kenny Read commentating "And you can see the nice smooth turn that Spithill has been making around the bottom mark.  And that's some good crew work to get the spare kayak to leeward in this light air, really helps turn the boat. Team NZ made the controversial design decision to use only a 2 burner stove but you can see how it's paying dividends here on the race course.  Now as you can see that the boat is nearly around the mark..."

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Boats can tip due to conditions and crew response but that does not mean they can't win another day. If capsizing F50s were put to the crackpappy test, capsize=fatal design flaw Season 1 SGP would have been cancelled.  

Let them sail in public (AC75s).  I remember back when the rule was published people who did not read it carefully and think about those heavy foils said they could not foil at any point of sail, could not dry tack, would fall over at the dock...

yandy261054.jpg

yandy253477.jpg

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, NeedAClew said:

Boats can tip due to conditions and crew response but that does not mean they can't win another day. If capsizing F50s were put to the crackpappy test, capsize=fatal design flaw Season 1 SGP would have been cancelled.  

Let them sail in public (AC75s).  I remember back when the rule was published people who did not read it carefully and think about those heavy foils said they could not foil at any point of sail, could not dry tack, would fall over at the dock...

yandy261054.jpg

yandy253477.jpg

Well admit it, the boat breakages and capsized yachts before the starts even happened made for a weak series (along with bad race tracks), I was at two of the F50 events and they both get a D+ in my book. I am from a school of thought that I want to see as many racing as possible, and this series can barely get all the boat to the line on a regular basis. the courses for the AC40s were not great but the racing was much better.  FWIW I have sailed cats since the mid 90s so I am all about cats and skiffs, these cats sucked and suck to watch.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, NeedAClew said:

Boats can tip due to conditions and crew response but that does not mean they can't win another day. If capsizing F50s were put to the crackpappy test, capsize=fatal design flaw Season 1 SGP would have been cancelled.  

Let them sail in public (AC75s).  I remember back when the rule was published people who did not read it carefully and think about those heavy foils said they could not foil at any point of sail, could not dry tack, would fall over at the dock...

yandy261054.jpg

yandy253477.jpg

Spamdaddy doesnt care that the F50's have shown the same tendencies, he just likes the pretty little boats lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Forourselves said:

Spamdaddy doesnt care that the F50's have shown the same tendencies, he just likes the pretty boats lol

 

The new class suck as much as the 50s. It will be a lopsided series with lots of money spent and few challengers, not much tactics,  much like the last 3 but the boats will be amazing machines in a straight line if they get off their bellies. When I see the boats doing tail stands I first think of people I know, people I have raced with and people I have sailed with,  25-30 feet in the air going 40+ MPH about to land a 70 foot yacht wearing a Zhik life jacket and POC helmet.  The last fatality was seven years ago so the AC are doing better then say F1 when Sir Jackie was told to shut up and drive what the rule said - during his time 14 drivers died, Lauda complained about machines that were unstable and under protecting drivers and 5 more drivers died and then when the ground effect cars started they lost 3 drivers in 3 years. Now AC is certainly not F1, but there have been a lot of crazy-ivans and flops the last few months so when some of the best sailors say, maybe we have an issue with the gecos, might be nice to listen instead of saying shut the fuck up. I have crashed several foiled boats doing 27+, it sucks, I have no idea what it must be like to have these beasts step out sideways from under you...    

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, XPRO said:

 

The new class suck as much as the 50s. It will be a lopsided series with lots of money spent and few challengers, not much tactics,  much like the last 3 but the boats will be amazing machines in a straight line if they get off their bellies. When I see the boats doing tail stands I first think of people I know, people I have raced with and people I have sailed with,  25-30 feet in the air going 40+ MPH about to land a 70 foot yacht wearing a Zhik life jacket and POC helmet.  The last fatality was seven years ago so the AC are doing better then say F1 when Sir Jackie was told to shut up and drive what the rule said - during his time 14 drivers died, Lauda complained about machines that were unstable and under protecting drivers and 5 more drivers died and then when the ground effect cars started they lost 3 drivers in 3 years. Now AC is certainly not F1, but there have been a lot of crazy-ivans and flops the last few months so when some of the best sailors say, maybe we have an issue with the gecos, might be nice to listen instead of saying shut the fuck up. I have crashed several foiled boats doing 27+, it sucks, I have no idea what it must be like to have these beasts step out sideways from under you...    

No one cares if its lopsided. 87 was lopsided, 92 was lopsided, 95 was lopsided, 2000 was lopsided, 2003 was lopsided, 2007, was closer but still lopsided, 2010 lopsided, 2013 was a close result, but still a blowout in the end none the less, 2017 was lopsided. The AC is about who can design and build the fastest boat, not the scoreline.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Forourselves said:

No one cares if its lopsided.

You always speak in absolutes like you are the arbiter of good taste. It is comical. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, hoom said:

@Lickindip can you measure the angle of the top of lee-foil arm relative to horizontal (gunwale to gunwale)?

If the bustle-less boats are running their arms flatter/more horizontal they should get more righting moment.

get me a perfectly square front/back on picture and ill have a crack

I have to say they are testing angles so what might be true in one picture may not be there norm

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, NeedAClew said:

What AC class after IACC could you even dream of sailing Sydney to Hobart in? 

J Class.

But it wouldn't be quick, because you'd be dragging half the bloody ocean along with you. And the provisioning bill would be astronomical! ;-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, XPRO said:

You always speak in absolutes like you are the arbiter of good taste. It is comical. 

It sure as hell doesn’t affect the event. Kookaburra got her ass kicked and the 87 event is still seen as one of, if not THE best event of the modern era

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, RMac said:

 Also the idea of a Hans Christian AC is a hilarious image. Imagining Kenny Read commentating "And you can see the nice smooth turn that Spithill has been making around the bottom mark.  And that's some good crew work to get the spare kayak to leeward in this light air, really helps turn the boat. Team NZ made the controversial design decision to use only a 2 burner stove but you can see how it's paying dividends here on the race course.  Now as you can see that the boat is nearly around the mark..."

Haha! Love it. Fastest we ever had her going was 14 knots but that was in 50 knots+ and 30ft seas surfing with a storm jib up that refused to blow out. It was scary as fuck and I was 10 years old. I think that was the longest 3 days of my life.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/2/2020 at 12:24 PM, Stingray~ said:

I like and respect Clean but yes, his stalking of you is a little strange :D 

Smackdaddy is one of Cleans socks. Haven’t you guys figured that out yet?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, Kenny Dumas said:

Smackdaddy is one of Cleans socks. Haven’t you guys figured that out yet?

Bwwwaaaam.

That would be an excellent twist.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, barfy said:

He's dumb, never been on a foiling windsurfer, and as a Quebecois, wishes he were really French

Ah ah, you are about as right as with your herbie, which is telling. As clueless as idiot. :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, JustinL42 said:

I do not get the obsession with how unstable they are? Moths are unstable, 18ft skiffs are unstable, The foiling cats were/are unstable, a Bermuda fitted dinghy is unstable. Formula 1 cars, touring cars, race cars are unstable (at the limit), The racing drone I fly is unstable. Almost anything fast and at the limit is unstable. That's generally what is allowing it to be fast and we watch in awe as skilled humans tame these unstable beasts and squeeze the most out of them and make them look far more under control than what they are. That's what makes it exciting and that's why we watch. If it wasn't on the edge of control it would be boring to watch and we wouldn't. I lived on a Hans Christian for years and it was fit for cruising but no one wants to see two of them duking it out for yachtings greatest spectacle. 

From my end the reason I harp on it is that the KiWhingersTM around here endlessly mocked the AC45/AC72/AC50/F50 boats for "being unstable" (look above - it's still going on) - and assured the world that the AC75 would be a far faster and more stable platform at speed...and boast the futuristic magic of being able to self-right unlike a multi.

As we've seen, none of that is true. Not by any stretch. I called this problem out when the very first animation videos of this thing came out. And it has turned out exactly the way I predicted.

So, even by the photos you see above - the AC75 is a mono that behaves worse than multis in terms of speed and stability in racing and exactly like mutlis in terms of being out of a race with a knockdown. It is really the worst of both worlds. But hey, it's back to tradition with a mono, right? [huge eyeroll]

To your point - I fully understand what you're saying. Foiling itself in inherently unstable...and fast. And I am incredibly impressed that these sailors have taken one of the worst racing designs in history and shown a fair level of control over it to this point. But the AC75 is just a ridiculous boat that needs to die.

  • Like 1
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Boink said:

"A mini keel, better IMO than a bustle, can also be used to put instruments/weight, and lower the CoG of the boat for better stability of an inherintly unstable boat".

Yet a Keel is superior becuase it can store gear and lower the COG - yet no one would not utilise a more Voluminous Bustle for the eact same purpose? .

Why do you make this relation of cause to effect that I did no do dumbass ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Ex-yachtie said:

What the fuck are you talking about. 

Who do you want to believe, boinkboink/bafidiot or Martin Fisher ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, smackdaddy said:

From my end the reason I harp on it is that the KiWhingersTM around here endlessly mocked the AC45/AC72/AC50/F50 boats for "being unstable" (look above - it's still going on) - and assured the world that the AC75 would be a far faster and more stable platform at speed...and boast the futuristic magic of being able to self-right unlike a multi.

As we've seen, none of that is true. Not by an stretch. I called this problem out when the very first animation videos of this thing came out. And it has turned out exactly the way I predicted.

So, even by the photos you see above - the AC75 is mono that behaves worse than multis in terms of speed and stability in racing and exactly like mutlis in terms of being out of a race with a knockdown. It is really the worst of both worlds. But hey, it's back to tradition with a mono, right?

To your point - I fully understand what you're saying. Foiling itself in inherently unstable...and fast. And I am incredibly impressed that these sailors have taken one of the worst racing designs in history and shown he modest level of control over it to this point. But the AC75 is just a ridiculous boat that needs to die.

But I thought everything the Kiwi's do is amazing?

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, smackdaddy said:

Well, one of these events has boats breaking 50 knots in racing (and still moving up the scale). The other doesn't. Never has.

And yes, BA seriously raised the bar in Sydney's SailGP event. How? By being stable at speed...because the boat computer allows it.

Anyway, I appreciate the plaudits - but absolutely no one on God's green earth can prove you I'm right.

I've fixed the comments above up for you.

Breaking 50 knots with 4 knots of tide running with you - yeah right.

You only have to go to Bermuda to see that top speeds are irrelevant. ORTAUS was often faster than ETNZ last time. The problem was they pointed 5 degrees lower upwind and 15 degrees higher downwind.

You and 50 knots have one thing in common - Irrelevant

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, pusslicker said:

But I thought everything the Kiwi's do is amazing?

Well, according to the Kiwis it is. According to the rest of the world, they seem to have an extremely high quotient of idiots in the population.

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, NZL3481 said:

IYou and 50 knots have two things in common - Irrelevant

Then why do you breathlessly follow and reply to my every post?

Sorry, I have enough groupies as it is.

ZpCEU6lwPU4zrjTxLf6N-wheD93LP1gBgDRHkV-v

I don't need another.

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, smackdaddy said:

Well, according to the Kiwis it is. According to the rest of the world, they seem to have an extremely high quotient of idiots in the population.

It could be worse, we could be delusional...

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Heh - and now come the Kiwi Tears...

sa_kiwis_feelings.png

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fwiw: During AC35 Bermuda, I think it was during the 4 day break, PB was asked if OR had a chance to pull off another development overtake. He correctly replied that, given the tight AC50 Rule, it seemed possible but less likely this time. But PB also made the remark (not realizing what was coming) that everyone was still making improvements to the AC50 and said “Can you imagine where these boats will be 2 years from now?”

Well guess what, he was right, the F50’s are now much faster boats in all measures than what the AC50’s were. As has been explained most recently and succinctly by Nate O.  The 3 sizes of wings is a major factor but the improved wing controls, foil architecture and foil controls, are too. 
 

Would love to see an F50 race an AC75 around a Cup course, no matter who wins. 
 

But even if we don’t get that, the AC75 race stats will hopefully allow us to compare them to the SGP stats, across TWS, AWS, TWA, VMG, heel angle, all of that good stuff. It will tell the truth about which class is the best course racer  under what conditions. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Stingray~ said:

Well guess what, he was right, the F50’s are now much faster boats in all measures than what the AC50’s were.

care to share the raw data or polars for each to back up that claim?

have F50's managed a dry race yet?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Stingray~ said:

Well guess what, he was right, the F50’s are now much faster boats in all measures than what the AC50’s were. As has been explained most recently and succinctly by Nate O.  The 3 sizes of wings is a major factor but the improved wing controls, foil architecture and foil controls, are too. 

You can make any boat faster if you take it outside of a class rule - like taking an AC50 out of being class compliant. More battery power, more computer power & more sail area. That should do it...

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Lickindip said:

care to share the raw data or polars for each to back up that claim?

have F50's managed a dry race yet?

I built an excellent database for AC35 Bermuda and even posted a link to it on Google Drive but no, have not put effort into doing the same for SGP, or I would. 
 

Their site and their videos are very heavy stats-wise though, we should get a good read on things if the ‘Christmas Cup’ and then the real racing gets done in as good a detail.

One of my favorite stats, I plotted and posted them myself for Bermuda and they matched exactly what the fancier/glitzier charts on live TV had shown, was the speed curves through tacks and jibes. I am guessing the AC75s will be better at it upwind than the F50’s but it will be fun to see. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites